- (1.) The claim in the suit is for restraining the first defendant from realising the amount claimed by it from the plaintiff on acount of risk purchase effected by the first defendant following the admitted failure on the plaintiffs part to supply the goods under a purchase Order. The plaintiffs principal interlocutory application was dismissed by an Order of December 7,2009 and affirmed in appeal.
(2.) GA No.2347 of 2009 is the first defendant's application for revocation of leave granted under Clause 12 of the Letters Patent. The thrust of the application is, really, to enforce a forum selection clause. GA No.3134 of 2009 is the plaintiffs second application in the suit seeking interlocutory Orders in aid of the reliefs claimed. GA No.3210 of 2010 is the plaintiffs application for amendment of the plaint to incorporate a claim in damages. GA No.3732 of 2010 is the first defendant's application seeking recalling of an Order dated November 24, 2010 passed by the Master requiring the first defendant to file its affidavit of documents.
(3.) The first defendant says that its written statement has already been filed. The opening paragraph of the written statement refers to the first defendant having applied, prior to the filing of its written statement, for rejection of the plant on the ground that the suit could not have been instituted in this Court. The first defendant says that though consent was given on its part at the time that the Master made an Order on November 24, 2010 for documents to be discovered, again such consent has to be seen to be without prejudice to the first defendant's contention in GA No. 2347 of 2010. It is submitted that, in any event, at the highest the consent on the first defendant's behalf may be seen to be a mistake and an application has been made for recalling the Order of November 24, 2010 before GA No.2347 of 2009 has been taken up for adjudication.;